• NASA's next Mars rover will look for signs of past life, launching in 2020
    29 replies, posted
[img]http://imgkk.com/i/pc94.jpg[/img] [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23259419[/url] [quote]The rover the US space agency (Nasa) sends to Mars in 2020 will look for signs of past life. It will carry a suite of instruments that will attempt to detect the traces left in rocks by ancient biology. The mission goal is a subtle step on from the current Curiosity vehicle, which has been trying to establish whether the planet has ever had habitable environments in its history. To keep costs for the mission within its $1.5bn envelope, the new rover will be a near copy of Curiosity.[/quote]
Fucking space. I love this kind of shit.
Why cant Curiosity look for signs of life?
[QUOTE=mark6789;41399451]Why cant Curiosity look for signs of life?[/QUOTE] I suppose it could try to, but this rover will be DESIGNED to look for life.
Oh man this is pretty cool. I hope that we can actually achieve a manned flight to mars in the 2020's
[quote]It will carry a suite of instruments that will attempt to detect the traces left in rocks by ancient biology[/quote] Doesn't Curiosity have instruments to look at the chemical makeup of rocks already?
[QUOTE=Cmx;41399904]Doesn't Curiosity have instruments to look at the chemical makeup of rocks already?[/QUOTE]Does it? Idk, look people, if Curiosity was capable of doing these things, they wouldn't send another rover there. Obviously Curiosity is not capable of completing these assigned tasks for the new rover, at least not with the efficiency and accuracy NASA needs. Also I wonder what they're going to call this one, probably not Curiosity v2
[QUOTE=Killer900;41399996]Does it? Idk, look people, if Curiosity was capable of doing these things, they wouldn't send another rover there. Obviously Curiosity is not capable of completing these assigned tasks for the new rover, at least not with the efficiency and accuracy NASA needs. Also I wonder what they're going to call this one, probably not Curiosity v2[/QUOTE] "killed the cat"?
[QUOTE=Killer900;41399996]Does it? Idk, look people, if Curiosity was capable of doing these things, they wouldn't send another rover there. Obviously Curiosity is not capable of completing these assigned tasks for the new rover, at least not with the efficiency and accuracy NASA needs. Also I wonder what they're going to call this one, probably not Curiosity v2[/QUOTE] What about anima? seeing as it's main purpose is to find traces of life.
[QUOTE='[EG] Pepper;41401359']What about anima? seeing as it's main purpose is to find traces of life.[/QUOTE]Hopefully they have another voting poll.
"dick smasher bot 9000"
[t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/PIA15279_3rovers-stand_D2011_1215_D521.jpg[/t] I was hoping the next one would be bigger.
imo it would be better with a lot of smaller rovers, so we have more chances [editline]11th July 2013[/editline] and we can take more risks and do stuff faster
[QUOTE=Cmx;41399904]Doesn't Curiosity have instruments to look at the chemical makeup of rocks already?[/QUOTE] They said curiosity is looking for habitable environments, while the new one would look for life, or signs of it.
[QUOTE=Eltro102;41401808]imo it would be better with a lot of smaller rovers, so we have more chances [editline]11th July 2013[/editline] and we can take more risks and do stuff faster[/QUOTE] smaller rovers can't hold any of the sort of equipment that curiosity can. the rover style they're going to be using now is essentially a robotic laboratory on wheels.
The new rover should be named the Indiana.
Why are they using the same boring layout though? Surely Martian terrain isn't so rugged that they can't use a pair of high-speed-ish tracks? Four wheels on double wishbones like a rally car? A hovercraft maybe?
I think NASA knows what they're doing. Why are people speculating on how they should construct their rovers or what the rovers can be used for. I think the engineers might have the slightest clue as to what they're doing.
[QUOTE=Eltro102;41401808]imo it would be better with a lot of smaller rovers, so we have more chances [editline]11th July 2013[/editline] and we can take more risks and do stuff faster[/QUOTE] Reliability is incredibly important to anything in space. More parts means more opportunity for failure.
Can we just send a human or two already?
[QUOTE=StupidUsername67;41405903]smaller rovers can't hold any of the sort of equipment that curiosity can. the rover style they're going to be using now is essentially a robotic laboratory on wheels.[/QUOTE] lab-on-chip systems are getting better all the time, so eventually I think we'll be able to just release a swarm of small rovers controlled by a big one instead of putting all our eggs in one very expensive basket [editline]11th July 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=TestECull;41406235]Why are they using the same boring layout though? Surely Martian terrain isn't so rugged that they can't use a pair of high-speed-ish tracks? Four wheels on double wishbones like a rally car? A hovercraft maybe?[/QUOTE] the current system they use is pretty great, it works v well for small obstacles and rises tracks might be a bit better but then you have the risk of something getting stuck/tracks coming off w/e whereas with this the all metal wheels are pretty rugged and strong hovercraft would be ideal for getting around but : martian atmosphere is a lot less dense than earth's, so the fans would have to be a lot more powerful, and a hovercraft would eat up a lot of power
[QUOTE=Pantz Master;41406484]I think NASA knows what they're doing. Why are people speculating on how they should construct their rovers or what the rovers can be used for. I think the engineers might have the slightest clue as to what they're doing.[/QUOTE] In any scientific field, its good to be skeptical and not give the benefit of the doubt at first glance. That is what pushes progress, increase in efficiency, cheaper production, etc.
beep beep space stuff
[QUOTE=TestECull;41406235]Why are they using the same boring layout though? Surely Martian terrain isn't so rugged that they can't use a pair of high-speed-ish tracks? Four wheels on double wishbones like a rally car? A hovercraft maybe?[/QUOTE] Because building a completely new rover is expensive?
[QUOTE=Smoot;41407353]Can we just send a human or two already?[/QUOTE] sure, just not back
I hope the next rover comes with [url=http://www.space.com/11241-nasa-mars-rover-3d-camera-james-cameron.html]James Cameron's 3D cameras.[/url]
[QUOTE=LoneWolf_Recon;41409657]In any scientific field, its good to be skeptical and not give the benefit of the doubt at first glance. That is what pushes progress, increase in efficiency, cheaper production, etc.[/QUOTE] Yeah, skepticism between scientists is one thing. People on Facepunch criticizing the designs of a robotic rover will not contribute at all to scientific progress.
Name the rover "Detroit" so it can truly search for lost civilization
I wish they would make a Europa mission
[QUOTE=Lick;41415451]I wish they would make a Europa mission[/QUOTE] Don't worry. That time is not far now. I'm confident we will be discovering the depths of Europa's ocean within our lifetimes.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.